Search for: "State v. Mark"
Results 2141 - 2160
of 21,680
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Nov 2015, 9:11 am
Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal BoardTopics include:"tacking" - backward, forward; judge v. jury (Hana Financial, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Oct 2006, 4:21 pm
In Community Credit Union Ltd. v. [read post]
31 Aug 2020, 1:49 pm
State Farm, 187 Cal. [read post]
24 Jun 2015, 2:55 am
But in 1990, the Court struck down that law as unconstitutional in United States v. [read post]
3 Jul 2018, 3:02 am
Corp. v. [read post]
19 Jun 2008, 11:19 am
Marks, No. 05-30218 (6-13-08). [read post]
27 Jun 2024, 2:08 pm
” 492 U.S., at 51 (internal quotation marks omitted); see, e.g., Stern, 564 U.S., at 489–490; Oil States, 584 U.S., at 345. [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 5:17 am
Already, LLC d/b/a YUMS v. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 9:00 am
PTY Ltd. v. [read post]
26 May 2011, 8:06 am
Speaking for the unanimous Court, Rothstein J. stated: “In order for the owner of a registered trade-mark to have exclusive use of the trade-mark throughout Canada, there cannot be a likelihood of confusion with another trade-mark anywhere in the country. [read post]
29 Mar 2019, 7:59 am
Worse for Comphy, the court characterizes the Comphy word mark as descriptive and not commercially strong because the word mark isn’t heavily advertised to consumers. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 1:12 pm
Redistricting — which is "primarily the duty and responsibility of the State" (Perry v Perez, 565 US 388, 392 [2012] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Growe v Emison, 507 US 25, 34 [1993]) — is a complex and contentious process that, historically, has been "within the legislative power . . . subject to constitutional regulation and limitation" (Matter of Orans, 15 NY2d 339, 352 [1965]). [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 1:12 pm
Redistricting — which is "primarily the duty and responsibility of the State" (Perry v Perez, 565 US 388, 392 [2012] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Growe v Emison, 507 US 25, 34 [1993]) — is a complex and contentious process that, historically, has been "within the legislative power . . . subject to constitutional regulation and limitation" (Matter of Orans, 15 NY2d 339, 352 [1965]). [read post]
12 Jul 2008, 11:16 am
In Grand Canyon West Ranch v. [read post]
10 Dec 2023, 8:31 pm
↑ Thaler v. [read post]
16 Feb 2010, 2:27 pm
A spokesperson for LVMH welcomed the move, stating that French ruling protects consumers from becoming a victim due to the “illicit use of trade marks”. [read post]
12 Dec 2010, 9:18 pm
Minneapolis police arrest author-blogger-gun rights activist Joel Rosenberg [Popehat, Mark Bennett, Scott Greenfield] In Wal-Mart v. [read post]
21 Jun 2007, 2:36 pm
The Supreme Court provided minimal guidance on interpretation of plurality decisions in Marks v. [read post]
13 Aug 2022, 6:31 am
In addition, even though the Ninth Circuit affirmed dismissal for lack of likelihood of confusion, it also concluded that the district court erred in adopting a rule excluding any consideration of a senior user’s post-infringement use of the mark and erred in certain aspects of its analysis, including how the court weighed strength of the mark and Bacardi’s intent (Lodestar Anstalt v. [read post]
11 Mar 2022, 1:38 pm
See United States v. [read post]
